The Three Spaces Model for Online CPD

Malene Erkmann; Anne Kristine Petersen; Pernille Lomholt Christensen

doi:10.16993/dfl.107

The Three Spaces Model for Online CPD

Designs for Learning

Volume 11 (2019): Issue 1

By: Malene Erkmann , Anne Kristine Petersen and Pernille Lomholt Christensen

Open Access

|Aug 2019

Abstract

- a model for designing assignments for online courses in Continuing Professional Development

The paper explores the challenges of designing assignments for online learning environments and looks into the use of models as analytic thinking tools for course designers. The paper opens with a discussion on challenges central to designing assignments for online learning environments in higher education. Subsequently, two widely used models for course design, Salmon’s five-stage-model (2002, 2003) and Ryan & Ryan’s TARL model (2013), are explored with the aim of evaluating their usefulness in Continuing Professional Development (CPD) for teachers and pre-school teachers, a context which has received relatively little attention in terms of research on course design. A number of assignments that have been used in online CPD courses for (pre-)school teachers are analysed with the aim of identifying design patterns, i.e. examples of how recurring pedagogical problems can be solved and, on the basis of this, a new model that can support CPD course designers in designing assignments, the Three Spaces Model For Online CPD, is presented and discussed.

References

Bain, J. D., Ballantyne, R., Mills, C., & Lester, N. C. (2002). Reflecting on Practice: Student Teachers’ Perspectives. Flaxton, QLD: Post Pressed.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bernard, M. B., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, Ph. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: from the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87–122. DOI: 10.1007/s12528-013-9077-3
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bremholm, J. (2014). Veje og vildveje til læsning som ressource: Teksthændelser i naturfagsundervisning med og uden læseguide. Et interventionsstudie om literacy i naturfag i udskolingen. Ph.d.-afhandling.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bremholm, J. (2016). Elevopgaver og elevproduktioner i det 21. århundrede: Præsentation af projektet – forskningsspørgsmål, metode og hovedresultater. Rapport, AUUC demonstrationsskoler, Odense, Læremiddel.dk – retrieved January 19, 2018.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bremholm, J., Falkesgaard, M. S., & Hansen, R. (2017). Scenariedidaktik og skolens opgavevirkelighed, i Hvad er scenariedidaktik, Aarhus Universitetsforlag.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Goodyear, P. (2005). Educational design and networked learning: Patterns, pattern languages and design practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21(1), 82–101. DOI: 10.14742/ajet.1344
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Heinerichs, S., Pazzaglia, G., & Gilboy, M. B. (2016). Using Flipped Classroom Components in Blended Courses to Maximize Student Learning, 11(1), 54–57. Retrieved January 10, 2018. DOI: 10.4085/110154
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hughes, M., Ventura, S., & Dando, M. (2004). Online interprofessional learning: introducing constructivism through enquiry-based learning and peer review. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 18(3). DOI: 10.1080/13561820410001731304
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Israel, M. J. (2015). Effectiveness of Integrating MOOCs in Traditional Classrooms for Undergraduate Students. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(5), 102–118. DOI: 10.19173/irrodl.v16i5.2222
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science. Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203125083
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lisewski, B., & Joyce, P. (2003). Examining the five-stage e-moderating model: designed and emergent practice in the learning technology profession. Research in Learning Technology, 11(1). DOI: 10.3402/rlt.v11i1.11267
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mor, Y. (2013). SNaP! Re-using, sharing and communicating designs and design knowledge using Scenarios, Narratives and Patterns. In R. Luckin, P. Goodyear, B. Grabowski, S. Puntambekar, N. Winters, & J. Underwood (Eds.), Handbook of Design in Educational Technology (pp. 189–200). Routledge.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mor, Y., & Winters, N. (2007). Design approaches in technology enhanced learning. Interactive. Learning Environments, 15(1), 61–75. DOI: 10.1080/10494820601044236
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nortvig, A. M., Petersen, A. K., & Balle, S. H. (2018). A literature review of the factors influencing e-learning and blended learning in relation to learning outcome, student satisfaction and engagement. Electronic Journal of E-Learning (accepted/in press).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Potter, J. (2015). Applying a hybrid model: Can it enhance student learning outcomes? Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 17(11).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What Do New Views of Knowledge and Thinking Have to Say About Research on Teacher Learning? Educational Researcher, 29(January 1), 4–15. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X029001004
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ryan, M., & Ryan, M. (2013). Theorising a model for teaching and assessing reflective learning in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(2), 244–257. DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2012.661704
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ryan, S., Kaufman, J., Greenhouse, J., Joel, She, R., & Shi, J. (2016). The Effectiveness of Blended Online Learning Courses at the Community College Level. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 40(4), 285–298. DOI: 10.1080/10668926.2015.1044584
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Salmon, G. (2000). E-moderating. The key to teaching and learning online. Routledge Falmer.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Salmon, G. (2003). E-moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online (2nd edition). London: Taylor & Francis.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Salmon, G. (2016). The Five Stage Model. Retrieved January 10, 2018 – https://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-model.html
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Staunæs, D., & Bjerg, H. (2013). Tænketeknologier. Når forandringer består – projekter forgår. Skolen i Morgen, 8, 4–6.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Taylor, S., & Ryan, M. (2015). Teaching Peer Review Reflective Process in Accounting. In M. Ryan (Ed.), Teaching Reflective Learning in Higher Education: A Systematic Approach Using Pedagogic Patterns. Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-09271-3_8
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction Between Learning and Development. I: Gauvain og Cole (Red) Readings on the Development of Children (pp. 34–40). New York: Scientific American Books. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0478-34
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Warburton, S., & Mor, Y. (2015). Double Loop Design: Configuring narratives, patterns and scenarios in the design of technology enhanced learning. In M. Maina, et al. (Eds.), The Art & Science of Learning Design (pp. 93–105). Sense Publishers. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-6300-103-8_7
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16993/dfl.107 | Journal eISSN: 2001-7480

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 118 - 126

Submitted on: Apr 27, 2018

Accepted on: Aug 8, 2019

Published on: Aug 23, 2019

Published by: Stockholm University Press

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Keywords:

Online learning,

continuing professional development,

design patterns,

course design,

assignment design

© 2019 Malene Erkmann, Anne Kristine Petersen, Pernille Lomholt Christensen, published by Stockholm University Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 11 (2019): Issue 1